I don’t think I particularly want a pointy sounding word for vulva because I don’t think of vulvas as pointy. I was just curious why you want a pointy word rather than a round one.
I don’t think I particularly want a pointy sounding word for vulva because I don’t think of vulvas as pointy. I was just curious why you want a pointy word rather than a round one.
Why do you think of vulvas as pointy?
Exactly. XY is not at all a hindrance to lactation. Because XY and XX nipples are the same. It’s just hormones (usually while pregnant) that make them function.
You’re not viewing cunt cells in ultrasounds people share. You’d be viewing a fetus, uterus, placenta. But that’s all internal. Not external.
You call called them vagoos. I’m not sure you have much room to judge.
You can’t see the baby without the ultrasound. It’s not like you could grab a speculum and get a good look in person.
That’s more adult slang for vagina. Little kid euphemism would be something like hooha or twinkle.
The problem is “a candidate dem voters want” doesn’t have any obvious choices.
Like Harris isn’t that popular, but the optics of skipping over a black woman when the VP would typically be the heir apparent? You think Gavin Newsom would be a good choice? Californians don’t have a lot of good things to say about him right now. I haven’t seen a lot of other names floated.
The country and the state.
More like “hand-crafted” or “rustic” for a similar positive vibe.
I think we have a different understanding of ranked choice.
In your example, you have 3 candidates, and candidate 3 isn’t very popular. He isn’t many people’s first choice. At the end of round 1, candidate 1 has 45% of the first choice votes, candidate 2 has 46% of the first choice votes, and candidate 3 has 9% of the first choice votes. Candidate 3 is then eliminated, and those who voted for him have their votes go to their second choice candidate. That should leave either candidate 1 or 2 winning. The only way he wins is if he had more first choice votes than one of the other candidates.
If someone who is everyone’s second choice but no one’s first choice wins, that sounds like approval voting or something similar, not ranked choice.
Edit: Looking at the referenced election, it looks like he was the most popular among the people who didn’t want the 2 popular candidates. The first round was 8 candidates and a simple ballot. The second round was a runoff election with the 3 most popular candidates and a ranked choice ballot. He won the first round of that. No one had 50%, so instant runoff, but he also won the second round of that.
To avoid that situation, you would have had to change the run-off rules to only allow the 2 top people instead of the 3 top people. But it still was an in person run off that gave you the result you dislike.
You know the alternate name for ranked choice? Instant runoff.
In your opinion, why does making everyone come out a second time produce better results?
And more expensive than flying a good chunk of the time!
It’s funny that they started with asking for ID and then changed their mind presumably based on how the person picked it up.
No. If you have hair, it needs to be covered. If you don’t cover it, then you ought to shave it. But women shouldn’t shave their heads. So they should wear hats. But if you don’t have hair, you shouldn’t wear a hat.
If you know what the Gettysburg address is about, I’d be absolutely shocked if you didn’t know who delivered it.
What are you referring to with Bowling Green?
Columbine was in '99, so that checks out. I think schools started doing them sometime after that tragedy.
They’re the exact same mistake. Since the commenter you were responding to wasn’t the one to originally make the mistake, but instead was arguing with someone who’s premise relied on that mistake, it’s weird to only get on them about it.
If it’s happening, I imagine it’s something along the lines of "Biden did bad things to trans people. If you vote for him, you don’t support trans rights. And Trump is even worse! Don’t vote/vote third party. " There are other issues where I’ve seen this argument, not specifically for trans folks, though.